First paragraph:
The third wave of radical right parties that emerged in
Western Europe during the 1980s and 1990s has generated
renewed scholarly attention for the study of this party
family. In comparative designs and case studies political
scientists have attempted to explain why this type of party
has been relatively successful. Much attention has been
given to the electoral appeal of the radical right, that is,
to the composition of its electorate and the particular
appeal of its message to this group of voters (e.g. Betz,
1994; Perrineau, 2001). Recently, studies have also focused
on the structural factors that have enabled the breakthrough
of the radical right (e.g. Ignazi, 2003; Jackman and
Volpert, 1996; Jungerstam-Mulders, 2003).

Figures and Tables:Figure 1. Party positions in competitive space in the
1970s and 1980s
Figure 2. Party positions in competitive space in the 1990s
and the new millennium
Table 1. Political parties and party families in France,
Flanders and The Netherlands
Figure 3. Political space in France, 2002
Figure 5. Political space in The Netherlands, 2002/03
Appendix A. Party Scores

Last Paragraph:
In regard to the distinction between Populist Anti-statist
parties and the NRR, I would argue that the differences
between the two are more substantial than Kitschelt's model
indicates. For example, nationalism is dominant in the
programmes of NRR parties, yet absent in that of Populist
Anti-statist parties. An important similarity between
Populist Anti-statist and NRR parties lies in their
populism, in this study exemplified by the positive stance
that radical right parties take on questions of collective
decision modes. However, in Kitschelt's theory this populism
could easily be mistaken for libertarianism, implying the
need for revision of the theory. The question of collective
decision modes in the libertarian-authoritarian dimension
obscures the true authoritarianism of radical right parties
and should therefore be excluded from
consideration.